recording cds - editing software

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Hello all, I would be grateful for advice here, especially from those who have experience in sound engineering, the process of making cds, et cetera.

Over the next year or so I'd like to give serious consideration to trying to make a cd of some of my repertoire. I'm curious to know what are good editing packages for manipulating sound samples, taking them apart, putting them together, all that sort of stuff.

I'm especially interesting in knowing how professionals edit these sort of things:

Badly voiced chord - can you correct it electronically, or do you just do a retake and cut and paste it into the soundwave at the relevant point?
Wrong note in a passage where there is pedalling and the wrong note hangs over into the next bar or two - again, retake or can it be corrected?
Tempo in sample 1 isn't quite the same as the tempo in sample 2 - how do you "Hatto" it 

I should have access to a cubase-type system via a third party, but I'm not very sure about its technical capabilities, and would appreciate advice. As I said before, if you have any editing packages you can recommend, please do mention them. And any issues I've not raised here but which might be important, feel free to mention them too. Thanks in advance for everyone's time.

[richard black]

OK, for conventional classical-music recording (i.e. recorded with microphones placed somewhere near the instrument, in several takes, and subsequently edited to produce the master) I think I can speak with some authority, having recorded, edited and mastered a dozen or two of such discs for commercial release and literally hundreds more for demo purposes.

To deal with the question implied in your title first, I use Cool Edit Pro software - since I bought my copy it has been rebranded as Adobe Audition but the central features are absolutely unchanged. It is just about the most capable package for this kind of work: it isn't always the quickest (though there's not much in it given the most time-consuming part of editing is invariably listening through loads of takes deciding what's in and what's out) and it may not be the easiest to use, though that's a bit of a personal choice of course.

Badly voiced chord - can you correct it electronically, or do you just do a retake and cut and paste it into the soundwave at the relevant point?

In theory one can do a very limited amount of electronic correction, and I have done so in desperate circumstances (i.e the artists have long departed the recording studio and there isn't a single satisfactory take). I have even put in notes that were never there. But it's horribly time-consuming, this kind of thing, and on the whole you're better off with an alternative take that can be spliced in.

Wrong note in a passage where there is pedalling and the wrong note hangs over into the next bar or two - again, retake or can it be corrected?

See above. Actually, taking out wrong notes is extremely difficult under any circumstances - in general you'd better regard it as impossible. I said I'm experienced at recording, and doing stuff that's 'not in the manual' is my particular speciality, but taking out wrong notes is one of the hardest tricks.

Tempo in sample 1 isn't quite the same as the tempo in sample 2 - how do you "Hatto" it

Funnily enough, that's very seldom a problem. Assuming the artist knows the piece well (if not the whole recording is a very chancy operation, obviously!) there is unlikely to be a vast difference between one take and another and the listener is very forgiving of this kind of thing. Recently I did have this problem on one particular edit and I used 'Amazing Slow Downer' (Google it) to tweak one take for a few bars to fix it.

I highly recommend getting someone to produce the recording for you - this basically means listening to the recording as it happens and keeping track of what's good and what needs taking again. Anyone with a good musical ear can do this, frankly, though obviously someone who can read the score and spot wrong notes etc. will be most useful. Self-producing is tricky (again, I've done it a few times) and does require a bit more time listening to playbacks at the session.

I notice you say:

what are good editing packages for manipulating sound samples, taking them apart, putting them together, all that sort of stuff

If you're recording a real piano with real microphones you can't treat it all as sound samples! - and therefore can't take them apart. What you can do is edit (bars 1-5 from Take 1, bar 6 and the first chord of bar 7 from Take 3.... etc. etc.). I hope that's what you meant....

Do you have a nice venue to record in? That's typically the most significant factor in determining sound quality of the finished product. If you want any advice on the recording part, just ask.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Thanks for that detailed reply! I know someone who should be willing to do production work for me; certainly it would make things easier then me attempting to do it all myself.

I notice you say:

If you're recording a real piano with real microphones you can't treat it all as sound samples! - and therefore can't take them apart. What you can do is edit (bars 1-5 from Take 1, bar 6 and the first chord of bar 7 from Take 3.... etc. etc.). I hope that's what you meant....

Yes, it is!

Do you have a nice venue to record in? That's typically the most significant factor in determining sound quality of the finished product. If you want any advice on the recording part, just ask.

There are a couple of venues I've played in where I have been comfortable with the piano and acoustics - I would be happy to record in either of them but a final decision will probably come down to such mundane matters as the cost of hall hire, etc. I've been advised to think in terms of hiring a venue for three days, first half-day spent setting up the equipment, and the remaining time should be ample for getting enough takes for what would be 70-75 mins of final, post-edit, playing time.

[quantum]

Like Richard, I too am a user of Cool Edit / Audition.  Currently using Audition 1.0, later versions seem bloated by unnecessary eye candy and "Adobe features".  I also use Cubase now and again, but prefer Audition when I am only dealing with stereo wavs.  I find Cubase a bit overkill to edit single track wav files.  In the end it comes to your skill at using a software package.  Use what you are comfortable operating. 

A lot of the work will go into controlling nerves, listening critically, and of course taking and retaking that part that just doesn't seem to go right.  You will need a lot of patience with yourself when recording. 

Realize that it is really difficult to fix a wrong note like you would with MIDI.  Most of the time you would need to record the section of the piece where the the wrong note occurred. 

When recording takes, I find it much easier to edit if the sections overlap.  Eg section 1: Bar 1 - 8, section 2: bar 7 - 17, section 3: bar 16 - 24.  That said, it is much easier to splice where there is a natural phrase ending.  You can find yourself in awkward editing situations later if you don't overlap, such  pedaling or notes that do not flow into the next section.   You play differently when you prepare yourself for a next section, vs. when you just stop. 

One of the first pieces I recorded for a CD was Chopin op25/1.  That was a nightmare to splice because the notes are continuous. 

I find it useful to listen to me playing the previous bars before I go on to record the next section.  Sometimes tempos can go off, after recording the same couple bars ad nauseum. 

If I make a little blooper sometimes I just go on playing as much as I can.  A lot of times much of the other stuff on the take is completely usable, and also has more spontaneity in it. 

[richard black]

A postscript on recording venues that I thought might be of interest for anyone reading this thread: pianos do sound nice in a place with a bit of reverberation - not too much, but a lot more than your typical commercial recording studio provides. Of course, one can hire a recital hall or some such, which will already have a piano, but my favoured option (and a lot of other people's too) is to rent a small church and get a piano shifted in for the recording. This way you also get to specify the piano. The last big recording I did this way cost £450 for the church for 3 days and about £1000 for the piano, including moving it and daily tuning - it was a Fazioli 227cm. Bearing in mind that most churches are available for very long hours within each day, that compares extremely favourably with a couple of local options here in London, The Warehouse (recital hall, rehearsal venue and recording space with resident Steinway D, over £1000 per day) and Henry Wood Hall (converted church used as orchestral rehearsal space and recording venue, also with Steinway D, best part of £1000 per day). Warehouse and HWH both impose a pretty strict 7-hour day, though of course you can go on for longer if you pay enough.

[ronde_des_sylphes]

A lot of the work will go into controlling nerves, listening critically, and of course taking and retaking that part that just doesn't seem to go right.  You will need a lot of patience with yourself when recording. 

Yes, I believe it. I've been listening to some of my live recordings recently, in a "be super-critical and ignore the good bits" frame of mind, and I now hate my playing (ok, hate's a strong word, but you know what I mean..)

When recording takes, I find it much easier to edit if the sections overlap.  Eg section 1: Bar 1 - 8, section 2: bar 7 - 17, section 3: bar 16 - 24.  That said, it is much easier to splice where there is a natural phrase ending.  You can find yourself in awkward editing situations later if you don't overlap, such  pedaling or notes that do not flow into the next section.   You play differently when you prepare yourself for a next section, vs. when you just stop. 

...

If I make a little blooper sometimes I just go on playing as much as I can.  A lot of times much of the other stuff on the take is completely usable, and also has more spontaneity in it. 

Strikes me as being good advice.

Thanks to both of you for your input - it has been most helpful and informative.

[richard black]

Oh yes, overlapping takes - absolutely essential! Only start 'cold' after a full silence of at least a couple of seconds, or the lack of reverb on the first note will make itself horribly obvious on the edit.

With practice you can edit in the middle of phrases, occasionally in the middle of notes even, but you don't know in any particular case until you try, so an overlap of 5-10 seconds gives you a few options when you get back home to the computer.

[m]

Over the next year or so I'd like to give serious consideration to trying to make a cd of some of my repertoire. I'm curious to know what are good editing packages for manipulating sound samples, taking them apart, putting them together, all that sort of stuff.

I am using ProTools, which pretty much is an industrial standard, at least here in US. Unfortunately it needs its own hardware to work, so it is pricey. I find it very user friendly and intuitive, and used to it and cannot even think of moving to other platforms. Once I tried Cubase and found it very awkward for what I am doing.   

I'm especially interesting in knowing how professionals edit these sort of things:

Badly voiced chord - can you correct it electronically, or do you just do a retake and cut and paste it into the soundwave at the relevant point?

If you know tricks it is possible to correct it, however, cut and paste would be easier.

Wrong note in a passage where there is pedalling and the wrong note hangs over into the next bar or two - again, retake or can it be corrected?

With long pedals mostly impossible without another, similar take.

Tempo in sample 1 isn't quite the same as the tempo in sample 2 - how do you "Hatto" it 

Usually, the tempi are more or less uniform. If not there are a few ways of correcting it: 1) splice so that the tempo change would serve music purpose, 2) splice only very short length (a couple notes), so tempo change will not be noiticable. In addition you can correct time by shortening or prolonging the notes, and 3) speed up/slow down parts needed.

I should have access to a cubase-type system via a third party, but I'm not very sure about its technical capabilities, and would appreciate advice.

It is matter of habit and all the programs do more or less the same thing (unless something is seriously screwed up). As I said, I am a ProTools person, but on the other hand, I am sure if I took time to learn Cubase from the beginning I might find it quite useful, I just don't have that time.
I'd suggest looking around and trying a few different programs to see what 'feels' the most intuitive, logical, and friendly. It is very much like a "Word" program and the main difference would be use of "fade in and fade out" features.

I'd suggest start learning the program and doing the editing yourself, if you have time. It will sharpen your ears and greatly help to critically look at the smallest details of your performances and suggest the ways for improvement next time.

Best, M

[ronde_des_sylphes]

Thanks, marik, for your advice.

I'd suggest start learning the program and doing the editing yourself, if you have time. It will sharpen your ears and greatly help to critically look at the smallest details of your performances and suggest the ways for improvement next time.

Time is not really an issue (hopefully!), and I was always intending to retain as much editorial control as was reasonable, so this suggestion simply provides another reason for me to involve myself as much as possible with the editing process.